HIGH VOLT ELECTRICALS PRIVATE LIMITED,TARAPUR BOISAR INDIA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PALGHAR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the lower authorities had raised valid factual doubts regarding the date of payment. However, the assessee presented additional evidence to support its claim of payment on March 14, 2016. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for verification of this new evidence.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed a deduction under Section 35(1)(ii) for a donation of Rs. 10,00,000/-. The Assessing Officer disallowed the deduction, holding that the payment was made on April 29, 2016, falling in AY 2017-18, not AY 2016-17 as claimed by the assessee. The assessee contended the payment was made on March 14, 2016.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was whether the donation was paid within the relevant financial year for claiming the deduction. Another issue concerned the validity of the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 35(1)(ii),Section 147,Section 144B,Section 148,Section 143(2),Section 80G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL
PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal filed by assessee is against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘NFAC’], Delhi, Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1087097731(1) dated 09.03.2026 passed against the assessment order by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) dated 10.09.2021 for Assessment Year 2016-17. High Volt Electricals Pvt Ltd. AY 2016-17
Grounds taken by assessee are reproduced as under: “Ground No. 1: Disallowance of Deduction u/s 35(1)(ii) – Date of Payment vs. Date of Acknowledgement Receipt The Ld. As
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 35(1)(ii)
- ACIT-19(3), Mumbai vs Zeenat Shafique Jagani, MumbaiITA 3721/MUM/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed31 Aug 2026AY 2014-15
- Vijay Transtech Private Limited, Mumbai vs ACIT Circle-11(3)(2), MumbaiITA 2644/MUM/2026[2016-2017]Status: Disposed31 Aug 2026AY 2016-2017
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle… vs Torrent Power Limited, AhmedabadITA 1117/AHD/2024[2011-12]Status: Disposed6 Aug 2026AY 2011-12
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle… vs Torrent Power Limited, AhmedabadITA 1076/AHD/2024[2010-11]Status: Disposed6 Aug 2026AY 2010-11
- Lalit Pipes and Pipes Private Limited… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Circle…ITA 838/MUM/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed29 Jul 2026AY 2012-13
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages PVT. LTD. vs. The Commissioner, CGST And Cx, Dibrugarh And AnrGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shree Sushruta Health Services Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Rst Batteries vs. Deputy Commissioner CGST Delhi West & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Dr.Sunil Kumar Padhi vs. The Chief Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- N.K Fashion Through It Proprietor Mr. Narender Agarwal vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Delhi EastDelhi · 14 Oct 2026